home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: co.general
- Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!agate!boulder!ucsu!ucsu.Colorado.EDU!fcrary
- From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
- Subject: Re: interesting thought (amendment 2)
- Message-ID: <1992Nov22.023522.21727@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>
- Sender: news@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (USENET News System)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: ucsu.colorado.edu
- Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
- References: <By112u.7Bo@fc.sde.hp.com> <1992Nov20.200959.23319@col.hp.com> <1992Nov21.231415@eklektix.com>
- Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 02:35:22 GMT
- Lines: 20
-
- In article <1992Nov21.231415@eklektix.com> rcd@raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn) writes:
- >As I wrote the above, I started wondering about Amendment 2 _vs_ Article I
- >of the US Constitution. I don't think I've heard this mentioned in the Am
- >2 discussion (if I've missed it, sorry; just quietly toast me in email:-):
- >Why does Am 2 not violate the right "to petition the government for a
- >redress of grievances"? Or am I badly misunderstanding Article I?
-
- I think you mean the First Amendment to the Constitution. However,
- the clause you refer to isn't voilated by Amendment 2: Any one can
- still assemble, speak out against and generally complain to the
- government (including complaints in the form of petitions) about gay
- rights and/or the lack of anti-discrimination laws in Colorado. The
- important point is that the First Amendment doesn't require the
- government to pay any attention to such complaints (The version of
- it that Madison first proposed did require this, but it was watered
- down by the House of Representatives...)
-
- Frank Crary
- CU Boulder
-
-